Antivax Parents Dig In Heels At Pro Vaccine Messaging

A new study reported in Pediatrics has found that when parents already eye vaccines askance, information setting the record straight only makes them dig in their heels more. Indeed, according to reporting from Jonel Aleccia at NBC News:

Information debunking discredited claims of a link between autism and the MMR vaccine successfully corrected parents’ views, but it didn’t budge their intent to vaccinate, the study found. In fact, among those with least favorable views of vaccines, the chance that they would vaccinate future kids fell from 70 percent to 45 percent.

Why?

Barbara Loe Fisher, a longtime campaigner against vaccines, asserts that efforts to influence or correctly inform parents who oppose vaccines backfire especially when that message comes from public officials because, according the NBC story:

“That is counterproductive because most Americans are inclined to value freedom of thought and belief and resist being told what to think, believe or do,” Fisher said.

Of course, this shouldn’t be about belief. It should be about facts and data and the reality of viral and bacterial invasion of our bodies and resulting death and disease. But biologically, we’re also primates who depend heavily on social influence and the social alchemy of our interactions. Fisher stakes a claim in that quote to a kind of American exceptionalism, but valuing freedom of thought and resisting instruction from on high isn’t an “American” value. It’s a human inclination that repels people away from outside forces and inward to their social networks. And of course, she herself works very hard to influence people to believe as she does.

What it actually comes down to, according to the study authors, is that pro-vaccine literature with a “dramatic narrative” and images of sick children has a “danger-priming effect.” Instead of leading parents to protect their children from these illnesses by having them vaccinated, this kind of material appears to kick parental fears of harm into overdrive.

Most parents can probably relate: A list of a few of the random ways the world can harm our children can lead to an accretion of internal anxiety and then an understandable desire to wrap our bairns in thick padding reinforced with titanium armor to protect them from All Of That.

Luckily, we’re not talking about that many parents when we look at the United States as a whole. According to Aleccia’s article:

While the vast majority of Americans favor vaccination — more than 90 percent of kids get the MMR vaccine on the recommended schedule — many have concerns about vaccine effects and a tiny minority — less than 1 percent — don’t vaccinate their children at all.

The unfortunate thing is that the 1 percent tends to collect in hotspots of vaccine denial, places that then can become hotspots of outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases. Also unfortunate is that even as information campaigns debunk an autism-vaccine link and reduce misperceptions, according to the paper authors, such campaigns:

…also reduced intention to vaccinate among parents with the least favorable vaccine attitudes.

These findings add to a growing understanding on all scientific communication fronts that the way to reach people isn’t to scare the bejeesus out of them. People might like the thrill of a scary movie, but real-life fear and anxiety make us want to reject whatever’s associated with them. That rejection can be especially strong if we’re already primed in that direction. As the study authors note:

We found that a provaccination message was least persuasive among parents with the most negative attitudes towards vaccines – the group of greatest public health concern.

Paper author Brendan Nyhan and colleagues suggest that public health campaigns first go through testing with skeptical audiences. But it might be that such campaigns aren’t ever going to be terribly effective. The CDC is never going to be anyone’s bestie.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

Comments

Nobody wants to comply with mandates that are impacting their health!!! If doctors would listen to what the parents want, they might be more likely to comply. As a health care provider, I recommend starting immunizations at the age of two with just one single shot being given every six months. This doesn’t overwhelm the immune system and gives the body a chance to develop the anti-bodies necessary to fend off disease!!! It’s the AMA’s own fault that these parents are non-believers!!!

kathie, what evidence demonstrates that following the recommended childhood vaccination schedule confers a risk that the child’s immune system will somehow become ‘overwhelmed’?

What evidence demonstrates that waiting instead until the age of two, and then giving single vaccinations every six months thereafter. does anything at all other than leave the child at risk of contracting serious infectious disease for an extended period of time?

A. I’m sorry to hear that you, a health provider, are deviating from the customary standard of care and encourage parents to leave their children at risk of disease for so long. I hope no child pays the price for this problematic advice. Be aware that the standard for medical malpractice is the standard of care in the profession. B. A separate question is the issue of mandating care – which could, among some parents, generate resistance, though I hope most parents will look at the evidence and realize that vaccinating on schedule is the right choice. But this article has nothing to do with that. It’s not about mandating, it’s about how to communicate.

Kathie Muth ~ I recommend starting immunizations at the age of two with just one single shot being given every six months.

Sounds reasonable, but it goes against the policy of Bad pharma !! It might also prove without doubt the issue they have been dancing around. If we also reduce the amount of vaccines given it might reduce the number of SIDs and Autism – to the level other nations that have less vaccines have. Worth a try.

then there’s Dr Viera Scheibner ~ ”The age at which most (80%) cot deaths happen is between two and six months. Doctors usually say that this is coincidental with vaccinations. However, most studies of cot deaths and infantile convulsions do not include information on vaccination.”

A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association* found that children diagnosed with asthma (a respiratory ailment not unlike SIDS) were five times more likely than not to have received pertussis vaccine.